Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Post-Oracle Purchase, How Is Sun's Software Doing?

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the first-the-pro-side dept.

Java 235

GMGruman writes "Oracle has steadily provoked the open source community since its acquisition of Sun, raising the question of whether the move will simply destroy Sun. But as Paul Krill observes, Oracle has been steadfast in upgrading Sun-derived technologies — and making them profitable, which should mean they will stick around a long time."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

It's been Rocky (2)

Virtucon (127420) | more than 3 years ago | (#35165428)

Overall it's been good for Oracle, not so much for Sun's existing customers. The HP/Oracle feud has also affected product directions like the Oracle Database Machine which was released on HP gear, and now is on Sun Opeterons. Products like OpenSSO have been left in a confusing mess and Oracle going after Java partners (Google) isn't a good thing.

Re:It's been Rocky (1)

Freaky Spook (811861) | more than 3 years ago | (#35168290)

I'm working with a client still trying to get their Sun Software Support agreement recognised by Oracle. The Product support contract was not recognised in Oracle's support system when we migrated off Sunsolve and after waiting on hold for over 4 hours the other day we are still no closer to fixing it.

Actually getting a hold of someone at Oracle is difficult, compared to Sun where they would work really hard to maintain relationships.

Minecraft (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35165442)

I think minecraft will be the contributing factor to the success of Java!

Re:Minecraft (1)

butalearner (1235200) | more than 3 years ago | (#35165484)

Minecraft confirms it, Java is not dead.

Java and Minecraft might as well merge (1)

judeancodersfront (1760122) | more than 3 years ago | (#35165706)

What else on the desktop uses Java? And please do not say Eclipse or a bit-torrent client that came out years ago.

Re:Java and Minecraft might as well merge (2)

S.O.B. (136083) | more than 3 years ago | (#35165952)

Forget about the desktop. Android apps are written in Java.

Re:Java and Minecraft might as well merge (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35166118)

Not always. Any JVM language can produce bytecode that converts to Dalvik representation.

Re:Java and Minecraft might as well merge (3, Insightful)

mswhippingboy (754599) | more than 3 years ago | (#35166704)

Just about every vendor's enterprise desktop applications I've seen over the last 5 years or so. Of course, I realize that enterprise applications are not cool on /. so I can see how this goes unnoticed.

Re:Java and Minecraft might as well merge (1)

Richard Steiner (1585) | more than 3 years ago | (#35166790)

They aren't cool in a lot of corporations, either. :-)

Re:Java and Minecraft might as well merge (2)

mswhippingboy (754599) | more than 3 years ago | (#35167168)

Can you name one large corporation that doesn't have Java just about everywhere? If it's not the primary development language, it's certain ONE of the top (and by "large corporation" I'm talking F1000, not your parent's garage). I've working in many large enterprise development shops over the years and I haven't found a single one.

Even if they don't do their own development using Java, their infrastructure (ESBs, BPMs, SOAs, etc) is wall to wall java code. Why? Sorry to piss off the java-haters here in /., but it's that way because it just works that damn well. End of story.

Re:Java and Minecraft might as well merge (1)

sortius_nod (1080919) | more than 3 years ago | (#35167056)

Maximo uses Java. I only know this as my fiance is an admin for a company that uses Maximo.

Re:Java and Minecraft might as well merge (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 3 years ago | (#35167912)

Why shouldn't I say Eclipse? I mean, yes, there are other torrent clients which do what Azureus did, and better, but I don't really see much of a competitor to Eclipse besides, say, Netbeans, if you want a portable IDE.

If you don't care about portability, or if you don't care about IDEs, then sure, use vim, Visual Studio, emacs, or Xcode. But I do care about these things, so what else should I be looking at? (I use Kate for most of my day-to-day stuff, for what that's worth.)

Re:Minecraft (0)

codepunk (167897) | more than 3 years ago | (#35165516)

Minecraft is cool, but it could have been fantastic had it been written on a real game engine.

Re:Minecraft (1)

i_ate_god (899684) | more than 3 years ago | (#35165570)

you mean like, Garry's Mod?

Re:Minecraft (1)

AndrewNeo (979708) | more than 3 years ago | (#35165688)

Unfortunately since the Source Engine is BSP based, all the blocks in the world would have to be entities instead of world elements themselves, and that's kind of limited (in most 3D engines, really) compared to Minecraft's expanse. At best it'd have to be modified all the way down in engine code to work the way it does now.

Re:Minecraft (1)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 3 years ago | (#35165586)

Especially since it's more or less unplayable after an hour on my 2.4 gHz Dual Core MacBook Pro w/8GB of RAM.

In C, Obj-C, C++ or anything I couldn't imagine it being this slow.

Re:Minecraft (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35165752)

In C it's usually hard to make something slow (except for algorithms), but you'd also see the same incompetent programmer either never release the project, or release it in a state of absolute instability.

C++ programmed by the same fool is just about as slow as Java (unless C++ to him means C-with-classes, in which case it has the same problems as C).

So basically, be careful what you wish for. Only people skilled in C and C++ will manage to write stable, fast code. Amazingly, the same is generally true of Java.

Re:Minecraft (1)

HAKdragon (193605) | more than 3 years ago | (#35167000)

I've never had an issue with it on my machine and it's not exactly top of the line: 1.8Ghz Core 2 Duo, 2GB of RAM, GeForce 7300, Ubuntu 10.10

Re:Minecraft (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35165612)

Minecraft actually harms the reputation of Java. People look at how flawed it is, and wish it was programmed in another language. People assume that most of Minecraft's issues are the result of using Java... without considering the programmer's failings.

Of course, there ARE actual problems with Java. It should never be seen on the desktop, ever ever ever. But that doesn't mean it's completely to blame for everything wrong with a program.

Or Minecraft shows the flaws of Java (1)

judeancodersfront (1760122) | more than 3 years ago | (#35165802)

I don't see why the programmer should be blamed when he is one of the few people that has actually created a popular Java program. Perhaps you have to be very talented to just build a mediocre program with Java.

Re:Or Minecraft shows the flaws of Java (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35165960)

You're joking, right? I bet you also don't know of a popular Ruby program, or a Python program... but that doesn't mean there aren't any. You just don't stay current of the relevant domains for its use.

I personally don't know any Java programmers who code for the desktop. I don't know any who would want to, either. It's tantamount to using C for a website.

Re:Minecraft (1, Insightful)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 3 years ago | (#35165834)

People assume that most of Minecraft's issues are the result of using Java... without considering the programmer's failings.

Unfortunately, that's what is said every time someone sees a slow Java application. Which is yet even more unfortunate as that seems to be the norm for Java applications.

When Java jockeys go out of there way to make noise about how speedy java is (faster than C), people have an expectation of it being as speedy as constantly boasted. And then when it consistently fails to meet expectations set by those who should know, people complain loudly.

Frankly, Java is frequently "fast enough". And there is nothing wrong with that. It is, after all, pretty fast for a fair number of use cases. I've used several Java applications which were fast enough and provided a good experience. Just the same, I've never run a real world, long-running application, which was actually faster than C or C++. Never. Not once. Which leads me to believe, either I've been lied to by Java programmers or every Java programmer is a bad programmer. Either way, its not a good thing.

The Java world needs to simply accept that Java is frequently "fast enough" and move on. Stop with the lying. Stop with the hype. Most people truly don't care so long as its "fast enough". That is, up until people go out of their way to make a big point about how Java is the fastest language ever created. Its at this point, everyone gets upset and disillusioned and then posts like this get written.

The truth is, Java, in real applications, is rarely, if ever, faster than C or C++. Period. In fact, its frequently much, much slower. The facts are, when people need performance there are really, really, really good reasons why people still use C, C++, and asm. Likewise, there are really good reasons why Java is almost never considered for these applications. And when Java is used in stead of C, C++, or asm, its usually because of corporate culture, idealogical, religious, or plain old ignorance.

Re:Minecraft (1)

Surt (22457) | more than 3 years ago | (#35166712)

Perhaps more importantly, java is frequently used in scenarios where developer time is more valuable than user time. Java can often get the job done in half the developer time, at a cost of less performance for the end user. Java has been able to significantly close that end-user performance gap, but it is still there. Still, with the lower development time, that's a big cost saver if the performance remains 'good enough' not to piss off your customer base.

Re:Minecraft (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 3 years ago | (#35168090)

Just the same, I've never run a real world, long-running application, which was actually faster than C or C++. Never. Not once.

Have you ever once had the ability to properly compare these things?

It seems to me that the differences between applications are far greater than the differences between platforms. Show people a fast Java app, and the response is "It would've been faster in C!" Show them a slow C/C++ app, and of course it's the programmer who gets blamed. It's really not feasible to implement exactly the same app twice, once in C++ and once in Java -- for one, the implementation would have to diverge to take advantage of the features of each language -- and even if it was feasible, it seems like it'd be a truly massive waste of resources.

And if they do diverge significantly... Suppose Java is half the speed of C, which is what I hear lately. That means "all" I need to do is find an optimization which gives me more than a 200% speedup -- but for many applications, there are all sorts of places where you can do that. Add a little caching here, pick a different algorithm there, maybe this entire data structure is poorly designed. That kind of thing is much easier to do in Java.

The question really is just whether Java is fast enough for your application, and if not, which pieces are really suffering. I actually take this to the other extreme -- start in Ruby, and when I find something that really needs speed, rewrite just that part in C. Then I get the best of both worlds -- faster development, a much smaller, more reliable, more maintainable program, and the raw speed when I absolutely need it.

The Java world needs to simply accept that Java is frequently "fast enough" and move on. Stop with the lying. Stop with the hype.

It isn't lying or hype that Java is sometimes, under certain edge cases, faster than C. Whether it is over the scope of an entire program is a different question.

...there are really, really, really good reasons why people still use C, C++, and asm.

I think this again falls into the realm of edge cases. In fact, I don't really see a good use for C++. The pieces of your program which really need that speed should be in C or asm, because you're going to be optimizing tons of shit by hand that the JVM (or your VM of choice) would otherwise try to do for you. The pieces which don't are now a liability -- there's really no reason I should ever segfault in the GUI portion of my code.

Re:Minecraft (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35165956)

Minecraft's failings have almost nothing to do with Notch and almost all have to do with JOGL (Java OpenGL) directly and JNI indirectly: essentially, Java's way of doing 3D graphics and the way it accesses real code (as opposed to virtual code).

Minecraft routinely crashes when I run it, but it's always due to JOGL. It's actually kind of funny how many hs_err_pid.log files I have. (Those are generated when the Java VM itself crashes - it's nothing Notch did.)

The one thing that it is safe to say is that no one should ever program a game in Java, and no one in their right mind ever deals with JOGL. Almost all the complaints about Minecraft's graphics engine is due to limitations in JOGL.

The only thing Notch can be blamed for is drinking the Java crossplatform coolaid when writing his game.

Re:Minecraft (1)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | more than 3 years ago | (#35165946)

When I glanced at that, I saw "I think Microsoft will be the contributing factor to the success of Java"; and had quite a good giggle.

So did the dinosaurs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35165446)

They have stuck around in one form or another for quite a while. They are even still quite useful to mankind.

VirtualBox seems alive & well (5, Informative)

Just_Say_Duhhh (1318603) | more than 3 years ago | (#35165508)

VirtualBox wasn't mentioned in the article, but when the acquisition was announced, I was really worried about that project. However, the release of VirtualBox 4.0 [virtualbox.org] seems to show that they're still hard at work - not just fixing bugs, but developing new ideas.

I can only hope other Sun projects are doing as well as VirtualBox.

Re:VirtualBox seems alive & well (1, Informative)

Capt.DrumkenBum (1173011) | more than 3 years ago | (#35165562)

MySQL, Dead.
Open Solaris, Dead.
OpenOffice, Dead.
Hudson, Dead.

It seems to me that Oracle bought Java, and maybe VirtualBox. The rest of it they threw away.
Note: I do not know, or care what they are doing with the hardware business.

Re:VirtualBox seems alive & well (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35165934)

Glassfish is alive, but at the same comatose pace of development that Sun was maintaining so it's not immediately obvious until you look at the project over a 3-5 year time period.

Re:VirtualBox seems alive & well (1)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | more than 3 years ago | (#35166114)

Wormer, he's a dead man!
Marmalard, dead!
Niedermeyer... DEAD!!

Or, my personal favorite:

"I want you to get this fuck where he breathes! I want you to find this nancy-boy Eliot Ness, I want him DEAD! I want his family DEAD! I want his house burned to the GROUND! I wanna go there in the middle of the night and I wanna PISS ON HIS ASHES!"

Re:VirtualBox seems alive & well (1)

aodash (776554) | more than 3 years ago | (#35166374)

SGE (now Oracle Grid Engine), Dead (closed and no longer free).

Re:VirtualBox seems alive & well (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35166722)

MySQL is not dead. Oracle dumped a lot of money, time and talent into the 5.5 GA release and it was the cleanest of any upgrades that I have done since 3.23 came out.

Re:VirtualBox seems alive & well (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 3 years ago | (#35167872)

I doubt much of anything else he said where true either. Though I don't know and I don't care.

For instance I doubt OpenOffice "is dead", forked yes, dead? Probably not ..

And if it's dying, is it because of Oracle or the people who forked it? And was that because Oracle did anything wrong or they where scared that Oracle would do something wrong?

Re:VirtualBox seems alive & well (1)

dnormant (806535) | more than 3 years ago | (#35168296)

And then they quadrupled the price of the maintenance contract. It'll be a slow death.

Re:VirtualBox seems alive & well (1)

HiThere (15173) | more than 3 years ago | (#35168464)

It's not clear to me on what basis the claim is made that MySQL either is or is not dead. Certainly there have been many forks, and also Oracle seems to be officially continuing it. (I believe that most current development reflects work that was done under Sun, so I'm not considering that as evidence. For that I'll take development done in the forthcoming year.)

Still, I can see lots of reasons that a form of MySQL would continue to be developed. This isn't proof that Oracle will see things the same way, and it certainly isn't proof that they do so currently.

I remain unsure about Java. Sufficiently so that I decided on Python for my current project despite the fact that Java would be faster, and leads itself more easily to parallel processing. (Running different [threads or processes] on different processors.) (Well, I also like the language better, but it was the uncertainties about the future of Java that decided me.) I had just about decided on Java when Oracle sued Google. I still have no idea what patents they are talking about, but I'd prefer to just avoid the problem.

Re:VirtualBox seems alive & well (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35166988)

Hudson, Dead.

Game over, man!

Re:VirtualBox seems alive & well (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35167186)

MySQL never fit their product line.
OpenOffice never fit their product line.
OpenSolaris was never an actual product (it was just public snapshots of the development progress between S10 and S11), with the release of Solaris 11, OSol completed its lifecycle.

This was all expected.

Oracle bought primary Java, Solaris, Sparc and the virtualizatioon stuff (not only VBox, but containers/zones/crossbow), all of which are getting Oracle love.
Glassfish and SailFin are still getting love, OpenDS not so much.

Re:VirtualBox seems alive & well (2)

markdavis (642305) | more than 3 years ago | (#35168420)

OpenOffice is not dead. It might not be moving very quickly, but it is certainly not dead.

Re:VirtualBox seems alive & well (2)

John.Banister (1291556) | more than 3 years ago | (#35166002)

I notice that they killed xVM Server and that they bought & killed Virtual Iron. They seem to be making an effort to avoid competition in hardware assisted virtualization products that install to bare metal.

Re:VirtualBox seems alive & well (1)

BuckaBooBob (635108) | more than 3 years ago | (#35167726)

Personally When I fire up any Sun app and see oracle on it... It feels like I am looking at Grafiti.. Only time will tell if Oracle will be open source friendly like SUN was.. Only time will tell.. but somehow I doubt they will be as friendly as SUN was.

I would say sun is done (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35165538)

For example, we have a brand new fileserver with 2 hour or so support that is not in production yet. We've needed support on the order of like getting a part and the new Oracle/Sun could not provide the part in a timely fashion. Took like a week. We are now looking at delegating this box to non-critical storage and buying something supported from a reliable vendor. We have also had a number of issues with solaris/zfs file servers hanging. Personally, I'm going to suggest to management that we not buy any more sun equipment. Its simply less reliable and more costly than the same product from Dell or HP running linux.

I don't believe any of the lead developers are still at Oracle/Sun. The java head left, the XML guy left, the lustre people were told to leave and most have. When you are in a service economy, you have to provide service. Hardware is a dime a dozen today. Software is mostly free. And nobody will pay for support when there is no support to be had.

Re:I would say sun is done (1)

wsanders (114993) | more than 3 years ago | (#35167254)

I concur, it took us over two months to get parts for some 6440 and 6240 blades that are only about two years old, but now EOLed. A 6240 died in production a few weeks ago, it took them several days to get a replacement.

And the online store is down this week, and no one knows when it will be back up. They are changing all the part numbers, as far as I can tell. FFS!!

Software seems to be in a little bit better shape, if you know the right people to call. But I expect they will shed the hardware business at some point.

Re:I would say sun is done (1)

otis wildflower (4889) | more than 3 years ago | (#35167586)

Agree, plus the abortion that replaced SunSolve is clunky, buggy and quite horrible. There's a few decades of sunsolve and docs links that are now borked, which makes life a bit less pleasant.

Thanks, Larry...

Re:I would say sun is done (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35168378)

The Java head left? I fear you have an outdated idea of who is the head of Java.

Solaris (5, Interesting)

codepunk (167897) | more than 3 years ago | (#35165548)

I have been making a killing doing Solaris to Linux migrations since the Sun purchase. My wallet cannot thank Oracle enough.

Re:Solaris (1)

durdur (252098) | more than 3 years ago | (#35165780)

Yeah, and Solaris (+Java) are the success stories of Sun software. What about all the other stuff (mostly acquired) they have been trying to market over the years? Anyone remember SeeBeyond (enterprise integration vendor)? Sun historically could not market any of this - it just sank because they were never a top vendor and didn't even get onto evaluation lists, much less close deals. Now, Oracle does know how to sell software. So maybe they can make a go of some of these products. But Oracle mostly had something equivalent already, so in some cases I suspect they will let the Sun software die (or more accurately, continue to die, because it was already headed there).

Re:Solaris (2)

FictionPimp (712802) | more than 3 years ago | (#35165990)

After spending 3 months just trying to get a software support contract for our servers so I could do what their support told me to do, we said screw it and started the process as well.

We are moving 12 servers to HP and linux. If only we could get rid of the Oracle database it's self I'd be in heaven.

Documentation died with Sun (5, Interesting)

BestNicksRTaken (582194) | more than 3 years ago | (#35165560)

I noticed today that there's a shedload of bad links left in google's cache.

try searching for just about anything to do with solaris and you get links to sun pages that now just redirect you to oracle's completely useless "Oracle Documentation" page which seems to be almost entirely about the database.

virtualbox seems to be able the only software now owned by oracle that it doesn't seem intent on killing off.

Re:Documentation died with Sun (3, Informative)

FranTaylor (164577) | more than 3 years ago | (#35166180)

oracle's completely useless "Oracle Documentation" page which seems to be almost entirely about the database.

That's funny I see these links along the right edge of the page:

Berkeley DB
Enterprise Manager
Database EE and XE
Enterprise Pack for Eclipse
Fusion Middleware
Java EE & GlassFish
Java SE
JDeveloper and ADF
MySQL
NetBeans IDE
Pre-built Developer VMs
Solaris 10 & 11 Express
SQL Developer
VM VirtualBox
Zend Server for PHP

I can still find and download the manuals for ALL of my old Sun gear (well except for my old 3/60)

Re:Documentation died with Sun (1)

wsanders (114993) | more than 3 years ago | (#35167288)

They have changed every link on the site. You will need to authenticate, but most of the pages that were not total cruft are still there. Don't expect to find any 4.1.3 documentation. nd I am not sure Googlewill be able to spider the new site.

Re:Documentation died with Sun (1)

Kinky Bass Junk (880011) | more than 3 years ago | (#35167372)

Most of the documentation is available within the Oracle Support interface, available to paying customers.

BigAdmin XXXXXXX (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35165572)

Google nearly any Sun product and see where the links take you. Try to figure out the new patching site....

The merger has been a nightmare for Sun customers...and now Oracle is stopping 3rd party vendors from selling hardware to put in Sun servers until clients sign an Oracle Agreement? WTF?

Re:BigAdmin XXXXXXX (1)

FranTaylor (164577) | more than 3 years ago | (#35166216)

"Google nearly any Sun product"

Why not try their Oracle's search on their page? They have moved a lot of stuff around lately and google hasn't found it yet. This is a google issue, not an Oracle issue. Everything I have looked for is still there but I will admit that I did have to look around a bit.

They've done a good job ticking off the FLOSS guys (3, Interesting)

Arch_Android (1989386) | more than 3 years ago | (#35165602)

I speak only for myself, but considering they've killed OpenSolaris, done next to nothing with OpenOffice.org, and are suing Google for Java in Android, I hope they die a terrible, prolonged death!! But, that's just me.

FLOSS guys weren't contributing to OpenSolaris (3, Interesting)

judeancodersfront (1760122) | more than 3 years ago | (#35165674)

It was basically an in-house project with the (failed) goal of attracting Linux developers. Did you ever visit the OpenSolaris forums? The place was dead.

They may be hated at places like Slashdot but they have contributed far more to the kernel than Canonical.

Re:They've done a good job ticking off the FLOSS g (2)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#35166334)

I'd be fine with them killing off OO.org, I think most people are migrating over to LibreOffice [libreoffice.org] , anyways.

Re:They've done a good job ticking off the FLOSS g (1)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 3 years ago | (#35167236)

I don't recall OpenOffice.org development being exactly speedy prior to the acquisition, and Gosling mentioned that the Google/Android issue was already well in the minds of executives before the acquisition, so I wouldn't exactly be quick to blame Oracle for ticking off the FLOSS guys.

Re:They've done a good job ticking off the FLOSS g (1)

jschmitz (607083) | more than 3 years ago | (#35168058)

I agree they are pure evil

Around with no customers... (5, Interesting)

Iphtashu Fitz (263795) | more than 3 years ago | (#35165658)

I work at a university which has historically been a huge Solaris shop as far as infrastructure goes. Hundreds of web servers, mail systems, LDAP servers, etc. have all been based on Solaris for many years. But Oracle has started trying to nickle & dime us to death, so with a new push to virtualize as much of our infrastructure as we can we're also migrating as much as we can off of Solaris and onto linux. We feel like Oracle is giving us very little alternative given how much more expensive they're making things. They may keep Sun/Solaris around for a long time but from here it looks like they may not have many customers actually using it...

Re:Around with no customers... (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35165844)

Same here. Also work at a major university that is abandoning a substantial installed Sun/Solaris environment en-masse in favor of Redhat/centos linux.

Re:Around with no customers... (-1, Troll)

FranTaylor (164577) | more than 3 years ago | (#35166242)

As a university you have been paying nickel and dime prices for your products and you will be better off with Linux anyway. Oracle knows this full well and they will not miss your piddling contract.

Re:Around with no customers... (2)

Bigbutt (65939) | more than 3 years ago | (#35166680)

The only problem is that they have the same thoughts about all their smaller contracts forgetting that the better, more well rounded Solaris admins come from smaller shops where they have to fix it all. So they're cutting out the new generation of admins. Eventually there'll just be the older folks (like me) who worked with Solaris for a long time being paid big bucks to support the antiquated Sun boxes during the next crisis.

[John]

Re:Around with no customers... (1)

pseudonomous (1389971) | more than 3 years ago | (#35167640)

Not to mention that many CS and IT students, who will encounter Unix/Linux for the first time at their university, might be exposed to Solaris and be convinced that it's the best Unix, simply because it's the one that they are most familiar with. (I'll bet this sort-of reasoning plays a bigger role in people's OS preferences than most would care to admit).

Re:Around with no customers... (1)

Bigbutt (65939) | more than 3 years ago | (#35166650)

We're the same. Oracle prices for the replacements for the Sun T2000's were too high so we stuck with the T2000's well after they were due for an upgrade. With the new nickle and diming we've been virtualizing app servers and new hardware is coming in as Dell R710's vs Sun systems. Sucks for me as I've been a Sun admin for 14 years with linux (while longer at 18 years) in second and moving up fast and hp-ux coming up from behind. Company's even paying for an out of state training class for Red Hat cluster services!

[John]

Not portable. (1)

bobs666 (146801) | more than 3 years ago | (#35165676)

Java been dead, Its not portable. Its fractured to many people have to many incompatible versions.

Here is a quote from the down load Linux / other part of the page on Mindcraft.

" Download Minecraft.jar, an executable jar file. It might work as-is."

Its just not reassuring. I tried some tutorials From Sun on a RedHat box and the first baby ones worked. But when I loaded the Sun libs for the graphics tutorials nothing worked.

Re:Not portable. (0)

FranTaylor (164577) | more than 3 years ago | (#35166294)

The enterprises that use java and pay for it do not suffer from such problems.

You say "java is dead" but it runs many many web sites. Your personal experience is meaningless.

Re:Not portable. (1)

mswhippingboy (754599) | more than 3 years ago | (#35166468)

Java on the desktop has NEVER been there, but Java on the server is seeing more usage than ever (up over 1% since 2010), far more than any other language by a considerable distance. Only "C" is even close (not C++ or Obj-C)

Sorry to spoil the "bash Java" party.

Re:Not portable. (1)

farble1670 (803356) | more than 3 years ago | (#35167162)

Java been dead, Its not portable. Its fractured to many people have to many incompatible versions.

ever heard of android? pretty big boost for java i'd say.

Re:Not portable. (1)

nicholas22 (1945330) | more than 3 years ago | (#35167520)

Meh, you're just like Miguel from the Mono project. What you and him fail to see is that if you let .NET/Mono grow enough, it will simply inherit all the problems that you mention that Java supposedly has. I have only seen more and more adoption on the server side and with fat clients.

Client Side Java is doomed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35165678)

Client side Java seems to be doomed. I dont think its directly attributed to Oracle, as Sun had ignored client side Java as well for too long. Oracle just seem to ignore it even more.

Re:Client Side Java is doomed (1)

mswhippingboy (754599) | more than 3 years ago | (#35166524)

Client side Java seems to be doomed

No, it's just called Android now.

Wish Sun had been bought by Apple (4, Interesting)

aclarke (307017) | more than 3 years ago | (#35165892)

It still makes me sad that Apple didn't buy Sun instead of Oracle. It would have taken less than 20% of Apple's cash reserves, so in one sense wouldn't have even been a particularly big purchase.

Apple has no significant enterprise division, and Sun was almost 100% enterprise. Apple could have merged its own chip fabrication division with Sun's, and picked up significant engineering talent along with it. Apple would control Java, which would have put it in just as strong of a position against Google as Oracle now has, which would have made sense strategically, as far as I can see.

Sure, there would have been some Java vs. Objective C questions, as well as Mac OS X Server vs. Solaris, but I think overall it would have been a healthier relationship for everyone than Oracle's purchase. Oh well, what do I know. I'm not a billionaire CEO.

Re:Wish Sun had been bought by Apple (1, Insightful)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 3 years ago | (#35166128)

Apple is not about enterprise. It's about selling expensive trinkets to teenagers, nouveau riche, and "me too"ers. Apple buying Sun makes about as much sense as McDonald's opening a luxury car dealership.

Re:Wish Sun had been bought by Apple (0, Troll)

aclarke (307017) | more than 3 years ago | (#35166276)

Apple is not about enterprise.

That was my point.

It's about selling expensive trinkets to teenagers, nouveau riche, and "me too"ers.

That's a pretty stupid comment.

Re:Wish Sun had been bought by Apple (4, Insightful)

ArmchairGeneral (1244800) | more than 3 years ago | (#35166510)

But Apple doesn't seem to have any interest in the enterprise. Most of their products are end-user oriented and in one way you could say they would like the client-facing side of the enterprise, if they want any part of it. AFAIK they've never put in anything serious for enterprise servers, and I don't think they want that. Of course I wonder why Google didn't pick up Sun when it had the chance. They shared a lot of common philosophies, especially those in regards to the open source community. Not to mention avoid the upcoming Oracle vs. Android lawsuit as they would have had Java in their back pocket. Of course Ellison might have found another reason to sue them anyway.

Re:Wish Sun had been bought by Apple (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35166544)

That's a pretty stupid comment.

That actually is a very valid comment. Apple is only about shiny gadgets, for which retards pay through the nose all while listening to what god Jobs tells them they can/should be doing with it.

Re:Wish Sun had been bought by Apple (0)

Surt (22457) | more than 3 years ago | (#35166824)

Apple is not about enterprise.

That was my point.

It's about selling expensive trinkets to teenagers, nouveau riche, and "me too"ers.

That's a pretty stupid comment.

In what way ... I'd say gp had it right on the nose.

Re:Wish Sun had been bought by Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35167816)

ROTFL, what a silly assesment of Apple. Tell me about yourself, I am curious.

Re:Wish Sun had been bought by Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35167932)

How was parent modded flamebait? He has a valid point and a working car analogy...

Re:Wish Sun had been bought by Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35166240)

I think Apple and Oracle would tie as terrible owners of Sun. Apple just deprecated Java and won't be including it with OSX anymore. I can only imagine how Steve Jobs would lock things down...

Re:Wish Sun had been bought by Apple (2)

MachineShedFred (621896) | more than 3 years ago | (#35166808)

For the umpteenth time, Apple did not depreciate Java, they depreciated their own packaging and distribution of Java. Now, they recommend you run Sun (Oracle) Java, just like every other platform known to mankind.

Stop spreading FUD please.

Re:Wish Sun had been bought by Apple (1)

Adambomb (118938) | more than 3 years ago | (#35167704)

they depreciated their own

Deprecation [wikipedia.org] , Not to be confused with
Depreciation [wikipedia.org] .

It's like the Lose versus Loose of Slashdot these days

Re:Wish Sun had been bought by Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35166954)

You basically suggested that Chrysler merge with Bridgestone, because Chrysler makes cars, cars have tires, and that is what Bridgestone makes.

The extremes of your knowledge of details about these companies, such as the liquid assets of Apple, and your lack of comprehension what actually constitutes a company, what the various business divisions are and how they work together, is perplexing.

Re:Wish Sun had been bought by Apple (1)

zlogic (892404) | more than 3 years ago | (#35167036)

Why the hell does Apple need Java? I the past 4 years they're been developing a closed platform that's does a limited set of tasks extremely well. Apple's business model is based on reducing hardware/software to a limited number of configurations. Knowing in advance where the software will run allows them to create a great user experience (or throw away the features if they don't work well, like video recording on pre-3GS phones).

Java, on the other hand, makes you write software for a completely unknown platform, with any OS, screen size and CPU. Now why would Apple want that? Their greatest strength is optimizing their software for a specific hardware/OS combination. Look at Microsoft, they wanted Windows everywhere and ended up with Windows Mobile and the touchscreen-enabled Windows 7, both of which are selling poorly.

Poorly, if you ask me. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35165928)

Things that I care about, like Open Office, Hudson, Netbeans and Java have all been negatively impacted by Oracle purchase. Open Office is irrelevant now and Libre Office takes its place. Hudson is forked to Jenkins, Netbeans just dropped official support for Ruby, and Apache has left JCP, Google is cooling off its support for Java, and Apple have announced their drop for Java support and threw the ball into Oracle/OpenJDK hands (they did presumably donate some of their implementation code to the Open JDK code).

So, overall pretty bleak picture. The shock waves of this purchase are still felt around the industry and the biggest one is going to be the slow, silent, painful death of Java (it's already happened among the cool kids anyway, the corporate drones are going to notice it 5 years later when the supply of cheap programmers dries up).

Re:Poorly, if you ask me. (1)

mswhippingboy (754599) | more than 3 years ago | (#35167332)

I get where you are coming from and Oracle has definitely hurt some feelings in the FOSS community.

However, I don't share your vision of Java's future. I think Oracle will kick Java into high-gear again (it was stagnating under the slow pace of the JCP). Regardless of what you or I think of Larry Ellison personally, the guy does seem to kick ass with everybody that's ever tangled with him. If I'm reading the tea-leaves correctly, this might just push Java to the next level, sending all the java haters scrambling for new reasons to hate it.

JavaOne and Oracle Open World (1)

jemtallon (1125407) | more than 3 years ago | (#35166056)

I think the JavaOne experience sums up the current state of Sun and Oracle nicely.

This year's JavaOne was pretty disappointing compared to previous years and many of us Java enthusiasts felt a little unwanted. Most of the focus was on hardware, which we didn't care about at all. Little of the content was geared towards a technical audience. The tech demos of past years were hushed into side rooms, replaced by celebrity meet-and-greets with Lance Armstrong, Apolo Ohno, the Black Eyed Peas, and a yacht racing team.

Someone must've been aware this would have a poor reception from the Sun crowd because they quarantined us away from the Oracle Open World groups much of the time and fed us uncanny amounts of free beer and vodka. The open bar seemed to be specially coordinated to just before and during Ellison's speeches about how lock-in is awesome.

When it came to the actual sessions, the speakers were great but there were moments where you could tell they were intentionally leaving things out. I believe it was a session with eBay's Randy Shoup where someone asked what App Server they ran on and he alluded to not being able to answer that since it "looked a lot like Tomcat." Of course the absence of Google was noticeable as well.

There's a little war going on inside Oracle right now between trying to mesh traditional Oracle marketing and lock-in to the Sun people who dreamed of openness and interchangeability. Obviously the two are ideologically at odds and all the liquor in San Francisco didn't help that. They're certainly trying to make it work and that's commendable but so far the result has just been many of the Sun people walking away. Sun's assets were as much the people and their mission as their patents and products. Oracle has so far ignored that half of Sun and it is rapidly hemorrhaging.

Re:JavaOne and Oracle Open World (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35166260)

I'm curious. Most of the Open Office or Java stuff I've seen lately has looked like Sun^WOracle Open Office or Sun^WOracle Java. So I'm wondering, did the speakers actually say "Sun control double you Oracle" during their presentations?

Still happy with Solaris and Oracle gear BUT... (3, Informative)

assantisz (881107) | more than 3 years ago | (#35166190)

we did move our hardware support to a third party company. Oracle's pricing is ridiculous compared to what we were used to with Sun. In addition Oracle was just unable to get us renewal quotes for equipment we have installed overseas in time. We still have to keep some support contract with Oracle, though, in order to have software support for Solaris. If you do the math we probably still pay about the same for annual support but at least we don't have to deal with Oracle anymore to get a drive replaced.

Curiosity Question (1)

tgetzoya (827201) | more than 3 years ago | (#35166342)

With everyone saying that they're moving from Solaris to Linux/whatever, who are the companies keeping (or even thinking about moving to) Oracle/Sun?

Re:Curiosity Question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35166828)

With everyone saying that they're moving from Solaris to Linux/whatever, who are the companies keeping (or even thinking about moving to) Oracle/Sun?

The companies who aren't in their mom's basement?

JAvA Sucked, Now It Blows (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35166786)

Java, the choice of those who, in their personal life Dymo Label each door and drawer in their house, now officially blows.
Java is now officially the New COBOL. LOL

Re:JAvA Sucked, Now It Blows (1)

mswhippingboy (754599) | more than 3 years ago | (#35167014)

Wow, do you live in fantasy land. You are now officially the village idiot. Join your brothers who've been declaring java dead for years while it continues to soar in popularity, completely out of the reach of EVERY other language except for "C".

I'm not real happy with the way Oracle has treated the FOSS community or with how it's dealing with Google on the Java/Android issue.

However, Oracle does have a track record of kicking ass and taking names and they do appear to want to push Java to the next level quickly rather than wait around for the JCP and all their committees to make up their minds on the direction the language should take. Stagnation has been a big problem for Java over the last couple of years, but I get the sense that the words "stagnation" and "java" won't been used together as much under Oracle's reign.

No Solaris patches without a service contract (2)

erice (13380) | more than 3 years ago | (#35166832)

Not even security patches. That means that Solaris is essentially dead for a non-commercial use. There isn't even OpenSolaris to keep those admins in the fold. There won't be any supporters to bring Solaris into new environments. I've been running Solaris machines at home for 15 years. I have been happy having a slightly non-mainstream server even if it was a little less convenient than a Linux box. Now I have no choice. I have to replace the Solaris machine with something I keep secure.

Re:No Solaris patches without a service contract (1)

daveoj (319762) | more than 3 years ago | (#35167334)

Same here... replaced all my home Solaris gear with NetBSD on the same hardware. Runs like a champ!

Orion App Server (1)

stacybro (757940) | more than 3 years ago | (#35167482)

Ever heard of Orion app server? Didn't think so (8 years after oracle "took over" the open source project). 8 years from now we will probably be saying "Sun? BEA?" never heard of them.

Simple answer: They're killing Sun utterly! (5, Informative)

swordgeek (112599) | more than 3 years ago | (#35167512)

We're officially a fairly big customer - somewhere north of 800 Sun servers, if I were to guess. Add another hundred workstations or so, and we're pushing about a thousand machines running Solaris, many of them running Sun apps of one sort or another.

Oracle changed the terms of our software support to the tune of a 500% increase. That's right, they want us to pay SIX TIMES as much for support! We lost all of our training credits overnight (About $100k in training dollars). Our hardware support costs have gone up substantially as well, so we're getting rid of our full-time onsite tech. (with the money we're saving by getting rid of the onsite Sun guy, we're going to hire two hardware techs of our own who are qualified/allowed to work on ALL of our gear, and still have cash left over.)
We are planning to migrate away from all Sun/Oracle applications by the end of the current support contract. Even the groups that were using Oracle Database before this are being strongly encouraged to look elsewhere for solutions.

Ours isn't an isolated case. The general feeling in the Sun customer community is that they're standing on a sinking ship, flailing at the floorboards with an axe to make it go down even faster. Every Sun software product is now in the 'legacy' section of Oracle's (disastrous!!!) website. Contracts have gone from three pages to 500, due to the lack of blanket terms. Oracle is TRYING to piss off their "Sun" customers as much as possible, and are succeeding. Oracle Solaris is going to lose more than 70% of its purchase-time market share by the end of 2013. Separate products (iPlanet, Directory Server, StarOffice, etc.) will all be shot through the head.

Finished with Both Sun & Oracle... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35168166)

We migrated to Postgres Enterprisedb Advanced Server running on Redhat Linux and haven't looked back. We threw out 2 Sun E10ks and replaced those with Dell Servers at 1/10th the size and 1/100th the cost. Why anyone uses Sun or Oracle anymore is beyond me. I guess they are mostly just stuck in vendor lock in mode and can't get out.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?